Anybody else ever feel this way?

[TheBigRedOne]

Each title and side has a different value for how quickly a unit can gain effectiveness. This is key for large scenarios.

[Wodin]

Weapon effectiveness is my major gripe with SB. Oh I love the series but no longer play it because certain mechanics juts don't work well and can end up being a game breaker for me. Weapon effectiveness is one. A game at this scale with individual weapons and soldiers should have proper ammo counts and be able to set ROF and have ammo dumps,ammo carriers and extra ammo in halftracks etc. AT the moment an MG42 can end up being a pea shooter because it is at half effectiveness which is supposed to signify ammo loss...just doesn't work well.

Sad really. If JT invested just abit..got rid of effectiveness..and brought in proper ammo count and RoF settings, plus added a wounded soldier mechanic, multi level buildings and enhance armour a touch the game would be the greatest Squad level game made on the PC and would be very very hard to beat.

At the moment though the effectiveness mechanic is it's biggest failing and in the end I became to frustrated. If I knew SB was going to have some significant investment in the future it wouldn't be too bad..but that is never going to be the case. That fact alone makes the whole thing even more frustrating because the game is so near to perfect yet falls down badly on this point.

[Jeff Conner]

I like wargames to reward players who use good tactics and punish those who don't. Those games that don't meet this criteria rarely get played much. I also like to know how things work, what the designer's rational is. This is not as critical; I can deal with some unknown calculations as long as they produce historical results. And most important, I like to games to play at a reasonable pace and not get bogged down. That's why I work on and play Squad Battles more than any other game system since East Front first came out.

Wargames attempt to simulate an extremely complicated human endeavor. Consequently, they are full of abstractions to bring the simulation into the realm of the possible. Squad Battles is full of these abstractions, more than most games. It is, in reality, a rather simple system and therein, to some of us, lies its beauty.

That's not to say I don't have my own pet peeves. My biggest one is that infantry type units don't have a facing and there is no significant advantage to flanking such a unit. This is ahistorical and I think should be corrected. I have suggested a few changes. None of have been adopted yet, but I believe that if I keep working within the system, it might happen. Might not too, I can't predict the future.

So if the specific number of rounds carried and the rate at which they are expended is critical to you, as you have already found out, Squad Battles is not going to make you happy. If this is a such a large abstaction that you can't enjoy the game, then by all means, play what makes you happy. The Combat Mission series comes to mind. They are beautiful games, full of all the hardware and details a player could want. But, to me, and it is my opinion only, they play at a pace that is just too slow and there are so many things going on that I just don't understand.

I guess I just like games that are easy to learn, but take a considerable amount of experience to master.

Jeff

[Rabbit]

Wodin, out of curiousity, specifically which squad level game that is currently available do you prefer better? Thanks in advance.

[Wodin]

Wodin, out of curiousity, specifically which squad level game that is currently available do you prefer better? Thanks in advance.

Hello mate,

Well they all have plus or minus..SB does some things alot better than others..just its minus is to much of a minus. So far the ultimate tactical game for me hasn't been made. I do prefer the top down 2D view point of SB and SPWW2 etc. SB is so close in alot of areas compared to others which abstract way to much (Conflict of Heroes), it's just the effectiveness mechanic for me kills the game off after awhile. I'm waiting on CMx2 East Front game, interested to see what LnL Stalingrad is like. alos can't wait to see what Bil H does with the tactical version of Command Ops (I read a tactical game design he has which if ever made would out do any tactical game made yet by a very long margin) and desperately trying to get TU to fulfill it's potential (at least Scott is constantly working on that and trying his damnedest to make it the best it can be).

I feel in SB if my MG42 is down to 50% ammo (effectiveness) I should still if I want be able to have as much power as I had at the start of the game but use up more ammo by having a high rate ROF etc...at the moment start getting to 50% and below your bone cutter becomes less effective than a full effective K98a. A way around this would be bring in just an ROF setting and the effectiveness percent drops quicker if you use high rate etc (but the effectiveness has no impact on the power of the attack only the RoF level does) or make the effectiveness modifier less harsh than it currently is and only start penalizing the weapon once below 25% or so. Or go the whole hog and have proper ammo counts. I just don't understand why the game does away with he usual abstraction in squad level games by having each man monitored and each weapon accounted for..yet then throws this abstraction in. An abstraction that covers ammo loss and wounds all in one.

Jeff I understand what your saying..but I don't think changing the way effectiveness works adds any more complication..I do think it would increase the overall realism of the game with very little impact on difficulty. You mention SB is full of abstractions..but it has far less than many other squad level hex and counter games with their step loses and lack of individual weapons within the squad just abstract attack and defense numbers.

[Richie61]

Wodin,

Having played lots of these game, I think you will find that SB is the leader of the pack.
Sure the graphics are dated, by the game engine is ahead of the other more modern titles.

LnL Stalingrad is based on the board game and the LnL system is dice/ card based.

CM2. It's a pretty looking game IMO.

Bill's title isn't squad based.

Tigers Unleashed:

Conflict of Heroes: Nice dice/ card based conversion.

Victor may someday drop down to squad size. Maybe?

I am guessing by your stats, you are more interested in AI than human?

[Richie61]

Wodin,

Sorry if I offended you. I didn't mean too. I thought I was being nice, but
I guess I wasn't. Sorry :(

Sorry, the TU graphics just seem to DOS to me.
I fail to see why bmp is still used. DSS and others are smaller files and yield better results.

SP was a good series and I agree on the graphics.

The new FPG2 looks interesting for the tactical stand point.